Best tank killer aircraft of WW2 Part I

[Lightning Guy]

That is why the Christmas 1915 incident was so frowned about officially. It was awefully hard to shoot and someone one day after you had seen a photo of him with his little girl just the day before.

 

[plan_D]

True, very true. But they say that only 2% of infantry in World War 2 were shooting to kill.

 

[Lightning Guy]

So what were the other 98% doing?

 

[plan_D]

Shooting in the direction of the enemy fire. Maybe hoping to dishearten the enemy, or just wound.

 

[Lightning Guy]

Shooting in the direction of enemy fire would still be shooting to kill. 'Spray and Pray' would still be shooting to kill. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that 2% were truly aiming at someone?

 

[plan_D]

If you shoot at someone in the leg, you shoot to kill? No.

 

[lesofprimus]

Who the hell in WW II was aiming for an enemy soldiers leg???

Pacifists???

U shoot someone in the leg, they fall down, pick their weapon back up, and continue trying to kill u.....

 

[plan_D]

It was mere example. I'm saying people might have been aiming for the guts, hoping they'd only wound them to the point they cannot fight anymore.
This isn't my statistic anyway. So take it up with the people who say that, not me.

 

[lesofprimus]

U said that..... I took it up with u.... And it was a poor example....

 

[plan_D]

I think it was a fine example. If you are shooting someone in the leg, then you are not aiming to kill them. My point being not all shots fired are to kill.

 

[lesofprimus]

Why the hell are u trying to shoot someone in the leg for???

And for ur information, many men died from having their femoral artery severed and bled to death...

Man, if u are in a firefight and can aim at the guys coming at u, or as your runnin up on them, u dont shoot for the leg... You dont try to maim, and u dont shoot to wound unless ur trying to take prisoners....

To make ur point valid,

My point being not all shots fired are to kill.

the only ones not meant to kill were the ones trying to take prisioners.... Or, the individual didnt want to kill, which is extremely difficult to believe.... If someone is trying to kill u, ur gonna shoot em in the leg??? Gimme a break....

And ur example wasnt fine... Ur whole premise is bogus.... We are talking combat in WW II, not a dispute in the parking lot of a Piggly Wiggly shopping center over who gets the parking spot....

 

[plan_D]

I never said someone WOULD shoot them in the leg. I was making the, which I thought obvious, point that not ALL, where ever it may be, shots are to kill.

 

[lesofprimus]

I once shot a Somalian in the foot when he decided after we disarmed him, that he was gonna slide a blade into my buddies guts... He never got the knife outta his sheath...

I wasnt trying to kill him.... But I shoulda...

 

[plan_D]

You should, but you were actually firing a gun not to kill him. Bad move but you still did it.

 

[Lightning Guy]

You could be aiming to kill someone and still hit them it the leg. You would me a lousy shot but its possible. And during combat a lot of people become much less accurate than they are on the range.

 

[plan_D]

Les was aiming for the leg though.

 

[evangilder]

Whoever said 2% were just shooting to wound has never been under fire. After a couple of shots fired at you, you are doing all you can to make it stop, period. Wounding someone will not assure that you will make it stop. The first shot, you think, "What did I do to that guy?". The second shot gets more serious. If you are lucky enough to still not be hit on the second shot, you start to get irritated, to say the least. The adrenaline kicks in fill bore and you aren't thinking "Should I just wound him?". More like "I'm gonna kill him before he kills me."

 

[Lightning Guy]

Like I said about a page back, I think than only 2% were shooting to kill should be interpretted as only 2% were aiming at a particular individual as opposed to spraying a general area. Even if you are merely spraying a general area your intent is still to kill whomever is in that area.

 

[evangilder]

Now that I would agree with, LG. Kind of like suppressing fire. You lay that down to keep the other guys heads down while your buddies move in closer for the kill. If you manage to get a kill with suppressing fire, that's one less to deal with.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

i think that if i was in a all out combat situation, i would aim for the biggest (and easiest) part to hit, the body...........